The Padres also got new unis over the winter, and haven’t broken them out (yet) in spring, although they did wear the white homes for their official photo shoot. Meh. Not a fan of the headspoon on this uni, not that what they wore last year is anything to write home about. A far better scribe than I wrote about the new duds back in November. Not really waiting with baited breath for when these (and the new roads — although I do love the interlocking SD for the alt) take the field.

The Mets still haven’t broken out any of their new unis, but they have a new blue BP top, which at first glance looks like their “Los Mets” jersey from last season. Two differences — no headspoon on the BP top, and the orange sleeve piping ends at the end of the sleeve, not about one inch from the hem. Paul has opined (or intimated the Mets have indicated) that they’ll wear the BP jersey at times this season, to prepare for the final ditching of ditching of the black after 2012. Thank You God! I’d like to think someone we all know and love had something to do with that, as he has fought this scourge since the late 1990s. And while the Mets haven’t yet worn their new unis in Spring Training play, that doesn’t mean we haven’t been treated to a viewing. OK, I need to change my pants…back in a sec.

The Tigers, like the Cardinals, also eschew road caps during spring training, wearing their home cap on the road. Since the two differ only in the color of the Olde English “D”, it’s not so stark as the Cards’ wearing red on road. A nice “ritual” to be sure, but nothing to write home about. However, the Tigers, like the Cards, don’t wear their BP jerseys during spring games, which in and of itself speaks volumes.

Interestingly, the Tigers and Cardinals don’t have alternate jerseys, so they both choose not to wear BP tops (at least I don’t think they do, they may rarely do so — I just didn’t find any instances of it this spring). However, two other teams without alternate tops, the Dodgers and Yankees, both have no problem wearing BP jerseys in spring games.

Spring baseball. It’s not quite the real thing, but it keeps our interest until that other thing this month.

~~~~~~~~~~

Colorize This!

Occasionally, I will be featuring wonderful, high-quality black and white photographs that are just begging to be colorized.

The usual G&G boys grace this page today, but we also welcome some newcomers and some newer contributors as well.

~~~

We begin this week with John Richards, an acquaintence of John Turney, who provided him with an “assist” on this nice photo of the Pack vs. the G-men…from the 1961 NFL Championship Game (that’s not the pic he colorized, that’s just a game shot I found):

Hi Phil,

John Turney suggested I submit this b/w colorization of Hornung in the ’61 Champ. John’s software is far more advanced than mine. I had to slowly outline areas & add filtered color. After he looked at mine he added Alien Skin Exposure (with the click of a button) which gave it quite a pop.

-John Richards

Nice job John(s) … keep them coming!

~~~

Next up is old standby #1, George Chilvers, who has a pair to share this week:

Can’t give your work enough superlatives, George, so just suffice it to say, “great job.”

~~~

Moving on, we have Pete Woychick, with two colorizations for us in two pretty-much diametrically opposed sports. Or at least they seem to be:

Hi Phil—

The other day, Paul ticker-linked this stickball photo. I took a shot at colorizing it. Admittedly, there’s a lot more that could be done—”paint” the window trim on the buildings, etc—but I guess that’s the beauty of it…

Thanks Pete — as others stated when Paul posted that stickball photo, there is just so much to love in that shot.

~~~

Closing down the colorizations today is the other half of the GC show, Gary Chanko, who has a knack for timing on his colorizations (and also recognizes a shout out from the UW Prexy). You’ll probably recognize this one:

The team went 30-1 on the way to the state championship after leaving most of their opponents in a hypnotic coma. In 2009 the team and it’s legendary coach, Bob Taylor, were enshrined into the Missouri Sports Hall of Fame.

Gary

And thank you GC — like with George, mere words cannot describe the awesomeness of your skills at colorization!

We have another new set of tweaks, er…concepts today. After discussion with a number of readers, it’s probably more apropos to call most of the reader submissions “concepts” rather than tweaks. So that’s that.

So if you’ve concept for any sport, or just a tweak or wholesale revision, send them my way.

Please do try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per image — if you have three uniform concepts in one image, then obviously, you can go a little over, but no novels, OK? OK!. You guys have usually been good with keeping the descriptions pretty short, and I thank you for that.

And so, lets begin:

~~~

We start with Tate Brown, who gives us a Texans uni only THE could love…and maybe Movi:

Next up is Kevin McClain, who may have set a record for the most possible uni combinations in a single team/concept submission:

Hey guys. I didn’t see your contest back in September. Should have been a reader I guess.

I too think the Seahawks are due for a redesign. Check out my creation if you feel like it. 65 combos I believe.

Home Navy: I kept the navy blue because it fits in with Seattle’s only other team and I think navy blue looks great on uniforms. In fact, I even darkened it. Just plain navy on white really jumps out and is easy to read. The Yankees and Penn St have done it forever and it never gets old.

(Note. All the dark grey is what it is. But the light grey is supposed to be silver, like the old Seahawks unis. Couldn’t pull off silver on MS Paint.)

Home Blue: Everyone wants to make the Seahawks look like the Lions. I don’t. But I do like the idea of incorporating the old blue. Just not too much. I think this blue actually goes well with the dark navy. I just don’t want to see it with the other jerseys so I left it out of the helmets and pants. Having these two types of home jerseys not only allows the Seahawks to identify with the early teams and the successful teams in the 2000’s, it also can reflect the Seattle weather quite well. Early in the season, the sky and the water are a bright blue. Throughout fall Seattle gets much gloomier. The sky turns grey and the water darkens as well. It would be nice for Seattle to use both blues.

Road Navy: A lot of choices on the road and not too crazy looking either. These numbers, I thought, looked even better with a darker navy.

Road Grey: These have Seattle written all over it. Sometimes you see more grey than other times. But there is always some green in sight even when the water or sun isn’t. That was the inspiration for combos lacking the navy blue. My Ducks also brought a nice combo to Seattle in which they wore a lot of grey and silver with only a green “O.” I guess that made this seem okay though that won’t go over well in Seattle. At the end of this photo is a road jersey with the old blue. I think it would be a nice jersey to wear unannounced sometime in a season. I would only wear it with the silver since it looked terrible against the other helmets and pants.

With the navy helmets as the exception, green is in the same spot on all the uniforms. It kept some regularity to a uniform that may not see the same combination all year.

The idea with the pant stripe was to be more birdlike.

Since it’s MS Paint, I didn’t even try to do the shoulder #’s. I would just put the same font on the shoulder if I had the technology.

That’s about it. Enjoy.

– Kevin

~~~

And we conclude today with another NFL concept, this time for the New York Football Jets, from Mickey Matos:

I think the Jets need to add a secondary color, as their look is a little bland. Didn’t want to do black, that’s too late 90’s, early 00’s so I opted for gray. I think the gray helmet makes the logo pop a little more, and the grey pants will add a little to the away uniform (as opposed to wearing those ridiculous green pants). I fooled around with adding gray to the jersey sleeves but it looked a little NCAA / Arena football league. Look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Regards,
Mickey Matos

~~~

And that concludes today’s uni concepts. Check back next weekend for more.

~~~~~~~~~~

Looking Ahead…

A little over a week ago, during a somewhat heated discussion in the comments about Native American naming of teams, reader JAson posted the following:

The argument over the Indians nickname & Wahoo always comes up, and as a Cleveland fan, I have a dog in this fight but my biggest problem is that no one ever suggests a new nickname! I’ll just throw out the suggestion of a rename-the-Indians contest for weekend posts. Maybe the commUnity could come up with a good replacement nickname then we could have a design contest to go along with the new name? Any takers??

I said shortly thereafter “let me run it up the flagpole…see if anyone salutes.” Connie immediately jumped to attention.

I’ve been thinking about this, and I think it might be good for UW’s next contest. Only, I was thinking of not limiting it to the Cleveland Baseball Team, but also including the Washington football and Atlanta baseball teams as well. So…if you guys have any thoughts about this as well as parameters (limit contest submissions to one team, to two or all three, include new names as well as uniforms and logos, etc. or first have a “new nickname” contest and THEN we simply have everyone design a team around the new nickname), I’ll begin formulating a contest. Also, if there are any teams you feel should be included in this (not saying they will be, but I’ll consider everything – teams like the “Fighting Sioux” for example or other college teams can be suggested, as I’d like to keep this to the pros). But nevertheless, do suggest away.

At some point in the near future (possibly as early as next weekend), I’ll make the official announcement, but be sure to check back, and sharpen your pencils be ready to fire up your Macs for this one.

Let me know in the comments below what you’d think might make for some good guidelines (such as including a short essay with each submission outlining why you chose the name/colors/logo for each suggestion).

And if you think everything surrounding the continued naming of teams for native peoples is just fine and dandy, that’s OK. You can still participate.

Fire away.

~~~~~~~~~~

And with that, we tie a neat little bow on this weekend’s Uni Watch. There’s plenty of uni goodness ahead this week, as the NCAA bracketology begins, and the specialtourneyunis get worn in the big dance (or at least I’m pretty sure those three schools are in — I honestly don’t pay attention to college hoop until the full brackets are drawn). Oh joy. I haven’t spoken with Paul about this, but I’m fairly confident Vinny will be doing his usual UW tourney pool, so don’t forget to get in on that, if that’s your thing.

Have a great week everyone!

~~~

“Absolutely the best part of the Carolina/KC tweaks is that the designer took the time to place a swoosh on the Chiefs jersey. It’s a shaky swoosh, drawn in a tremulous hand. And it is the first time anything Nike has ever made me smile.” — Cort McMurray

142 comments to Rites of Spring

Padday|
March 11, 2012 at 8:08 am |

I have nothing constructive to say regarding guidelines but until the competition kicks off proper, I call dibs on the Cleveland 10¢ Beers. I think it speaks to the storied history of Cleveland baseball but does so in a way which is fun. If anybody thinks it’s offensive then you’re obviously some PC nut, police, nazi, man, thing, guy, person.

Yeah but those are different colored So(x/cks) so they’re natural rivals. Do you have any idea how hard it is to wash Red Socks and White Socks at the same time and not end up with the White ones turning Pink?

Gusto44|
March 11, 2012 at 10:12 am |

Cincinnati took the music-themed Rockers name for their short-lived entry in the Arena Football League in the 1990s, with none other than Art Schlichter at QB. Colors were green and gold.

Jim Vilk|
March 11, 2012 at 11:45 am |

If you’re from Cleveland and you want to be non-offensive, there’s only one name to use…
The Cleveland Certain Ethnics.

Why are the Edmonton Eskimos never brought up in the Native Names discussions? Is it because they don’t really seem to use any native imagery with the double E logo? Is it because they’re Canadian and no one cares? Do they actually have some sort of agreement with the Intuit people that I’m just not aware of? I mean, from a pure name standpoint, Eskimos seems to be on the exact same level as Indians.

…and for any contest, I think you have to limit it to one team or at least one sport at a time. I don’t think it’s fair to compare football uniforms and baseball uniforms in the same contest.

JTH|
March 11, 2012 at 9:34 am |

This is a good point. Is this a controversial nickname north of the border?

I think it’s because we don’t use the term “Eskimo” any longer. We refer to the First Nations people of the north as Inuit only. It might be used colloquially, but the people are officially recognized as Inuit rather than Eskimo.

Of course, this could be wrong as well.

Jim BC|
March 11, 2012 at 12:44 pm |

Good question The. I lived in Northern Canada for 10 years and travelled to several communities that had a 99% Inuit population. In those 10 years not once did I hear anyone use the word “Eskimo”. And,not once did I hear anyone talk about how offended they were by the CFL team in Edmonton using the nickname “Eskimos”.

Dan|
March 11, 2012 at 1:07 pm |

The Eskimos name is not without controversy, but you only hear it criticized here and there.
Here’s a short video on it: http://www.edmontons...
Also, a Google search for Eskimos with “Bernie Adams” will dig up some stuff.

I think, as previously stated, the generic EE logo kind of softens things. They’ve also been around a long time. It’s almost like a Packers/Knicks situation where hardly anyone knows or cares what the team name means anymore.

Arr Scott|
March 11, 2012 at 6:58 pm |

Might also be a difference of history and context. You know the bit where my ancestors showed up in Massachussets in the early 1600s and systematically worked their way west for three centuries, killing every native they could find and throwing the rest into squalid concentration camps? Canada pretty much didn’t do that. While my ancestors were busy massacring the natives, Canada was the place said natives could escape to and be protected. Heck, just recently, Canada actually gave some of its northern natives the near-equivalent of their own state. So the Indian/Eskimo comparison would make sense if we gave North Dakota to the Lakota to run entirely, or if we were the kind of country where that sort of thing could happen.

Sorry for the double dip but my Mac literally needs fire to run it, it’s so @#%&*! old. BUT I got around to the uni artwork and just want to give a huge ^5 x ^5 to Tate Brown for his Texans tweaks. The creative rendering alone is super — as is the concept. Keep that drawing going Tate.

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 9:06 am |

This may be controversial…but hey this is the OBSESSIVE study of uniform aesthetics.

While I am profoundly thankful to Paul for helping Ditch The Black…and thank the Mets for doing it…and thank someone (Majestic?) for even fixing the crooked M…when I look at the new Met uniforms, I don’t see the original Met script…it looks ok…but I see a different script and it bugs me. Nobody else is mentioning it. Can one be too obsessive? By definition, I think not.

Perhaps everyone’s afraid that if we start pointing out the negatives, the Mets will reconsider their plan to ditch the black and just revert to their 2011 unis.

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 9:46 am |

The thing is, I doubt anybody with the Mets would even notice it…I think manufacturers make slight, unintended changes that accumulate over time. This happened to the Dodgers script a few years ago and their graphic design department restored the script and issued new templates to manufacturers. I’m no graphics expert, but my familiarity with the script over 50 years and my personal taste prefers the original…it looks smoother and more like caligraphy…the newer one looks too thick in many places.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 9:33 am |

Um…with the exception of navy belts and red cleats, the Cardinals’ navy-hat look essentially is an extremely accurate throwback (last years of Musial/early years of Gibson and Brock) worn every game on the road. Here, of all places, why would that effort not be lauded?http://www.vintageca...
For some, OCD apparently trumps appreciation of a throwback.

Besides, MLB already has a ton or team who wear red (or a variant) with their road grays (if I have to list them all, you’re visiting the wrong website). :)

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 9:39 am |

I agree with Phil…the red road cap, a throwback to the late 60s and 70s, looks better to me. At some point isn’t this about personal taste? Do we take someone to task for liking vanilla better than chocolate?

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 9:41 am |

I’m just saying that, for all the love throwbacks get here, why does this one get dumped on all the time?

Seems odd, that’s all.

concealed78|
March 11, 2012 at 9:49 am |

Probably because if you’re the Cardinals, you should wear red, not navy. I really don’t see the point of the Cardinals wearing a navy cap (always wondered why black wasn’t the trim color, too). Not all throwbacks are gold.

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 9:49 am |

I agree that dumping on it would be wrong…someone should just say “I personally like it better with the red cap” and let you like it better with the blue…there is no right or wrong here.

That’s a great-looking uni, but it would have looked even better with a red lid.

X|
March 11, 2012 at 10:40 am |

Quit your whining, rube.

JTH|
March 11, 2012 at 9:48 am |

I said it last night and I’ll say it again (maybe not in these exact words)…

What difference does it make if it’s an accurate throwback if you’re throwing back to something that looks bad?

And in no way do I believe that the Cardinals were going for historical accuracy when they brought back the navy blue caps. It was a marketing move, plain and simple.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 10:03 am |

Except didn’t they return to the navy hat some time before the current multiple hats template came into being? I thought it happened when they went way from sansabelts.

I think their home Sunday special hat is far more an example of that.

All about perspective, of course. Me, I see one hat as a valid throwback (because I was so familiar with it from seeing it road AND home all those years), the other (Sundays) as a gimmick.

Besides, with the Reds, Phillies and sometimes the D-Backs and Nationals using red with gray, it seems like there’s plenty of that look in the NL, already.

scott|
March 11, 2012 at 10:14 am |

I, too, prefer the navy cap with the Cardinals road uniforms. In fact, if they reverted to the red caps on the road, that would be a definite downgrade.

Gusto44|
March 11, 2012 at 10:19 am |

I still think an improvement to the Cards uniform is needed. Replace the Cardinals script with St. Louis on the road uniforms, and it would be a tasteful, classy, upgrade. Even in terms of spacing it works.

JTH|
March 11, 2012 at 10:20 am |

1992 — maybe very few teams were wearing multiple caps yet, but that trend was just about to take off, as the Marlins would come into the league the following year with THREE different caps.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 10:29 am |

I saw it that when they returned to belts they simply chose to wear updated versions of their last TWO belted sets…by wearing one at home, the other on the road.

Also, the Cardinals switch to navy hats pretty much coincided with WWII. Anyone know if that was a “patriotic” move like the Giants going from royal to navy and red? Don’t recall Okkonen mentioning such a thing about the Cards.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 10:31 am |

I’m sorry. Giants didn’t go to navy. Just added red to their royal and white color scheme.

I still think an improvement to the Cards uniform is needed. Replace the Cardinals script with St. Louis on the road uniforms, and it would be a tasteful, classy, upgrade. Even in terms of spacing it works.

i was thinking about this on my way to get my bagel & coffee this morning…perhaps a new acronym is ready for UW lexicon:

JBIODMIG

“just because it’s old, doesn’t mean it’s good”

not every uniform worn in the past, even if a team is throwing-back to it, is something that looked good, particularly if they’ve made it a part of their permanent look

i will use my beloved new york football giants as a prime example…while i can live with the gray pants, and i understand their historical accuracy, they never made much sense to me…same with their road jersey

yes, ricko and others, i GET why they wore it then, and i GET that it’s historically accurate (or as accurate as can be) now…but that doesn’t mean it was good then or now

giants should be wearing white pants and when they go with their white shirts, they should have blue numbers

you want to keep the gray pants? OK, but at least ditch the all (number & stripe) red road…they haven’t worn a red alt top (other than the mid-2000’s) since CBS dictated one team would wear white (1954?)…you can honor the giants past uni history quite well by going with blue numbers & stripes

it doesn’t need to be a complete “opposite” of the home, but it should at least look like it belongs

even their pseudo throwback with the blue collar piping and blue number outlines looked better than what they currently have

I think you linked to the wrong image for your home uniform, because that picture doesn’t look like Phil Simms or Lawrence Taylor at all.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 11:13 am |

Or, the Giants could wear silver/gray numbers on the royal jerseys as they did in GGEP era.

Of course, is all about “where you were when”. I imagine the reason the Cards navy road hats don’t bother me is that I saw that uni for so many seasons. It was a sans piping, one-color hat update of its long time predecessor (not counting the birds-on-batless 1956 experiment)..http://sportsillustr...

Sometimes I wonder if Jeff even follows sports at all based on his comments. Santiago & now this.

So, one player in a sport I admittedly don’t care much about and a uniform detail which escaped the notice of a group dedicated to accuracy, from 25 years before I was born means I don’t follow sports?

I’m sorry, but…. fuck off.

Phil Hecken|
March 11, 2012 at 12:11 pm |

“I’m sorry, but…. fuck off.”

~~~

ok, that’s enough guys

save the vitriol for the folks like canflam and his trollish bretheren

i didn’t know about the gray numbers either (though it makes total sense, especially seeing how the lions did it), and i’m a giants fan

GUys, I got Ricko’s message. We’ll take a good look at it. I will say that distinguishing silver from white is a challenge when perusing b/w newspaper pics from microfilm. About as challenging as deciphering red from blue.

But, seriously, isn’t the Giants current uniform supposed to be a throwback to that era? I don’t think the Giants’ gray/silver numbers is even remotely close to being common knowledge, if it’s even true at all, given the known issues with football card images. No offense Ricko, but distinguishing between white and reflective silver in black & white photography is rather difficult, and we’ve got football cards from the early 60’s that depict yellow-gold Raiders numbers and pink Oilers jerseys.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 1:11 pm |

They were silver.
Period.

Huge difference between a colorized cutout and a full-frame, uncropped color photo. With regard to its likely veracity, that is.

One thing about b&w TV. White was white.
You could watch the Giants at home in royal one week and the Colts at home in royal the next…and it took about two seconds to realize one team was wearing white numbers and the other wasn’t. If nothing else, the Colts white numbers were the same color as their crew socks. The Giants’ sweat socks where noticeably brighter than their numbers. With black and white, you had to find visual benchmarks. Crew socks were one of the good ones.

I’m not being grumpy about it at all, just saying that it was one of the things about which b&w TV left little doubt. Red from blue from kelly might have been a bitch, but white from most everything else was a slam dunk. Especially on a cloudy day or in shadow, because direct sun didn’t artificially brighten light colors.

The cheddar stripe on ’62 Raiders helmet is a perfect example. Was as easy to see it was a color compared to the team’s white pants and it was to see the Lombardi Packers wore colored pants and helmets with their white jerseys.

Also why not knowing the Pack had once had a set of white helmets and pants confused the hell out of me as kid. How could pants and helmets with obvious color at home somehow look absolutely the same color as the white jersey? I mean, the “gray” should have stayed the same. If the homes were white, they’d have matched the white jerseys of the visitors.

Made much more sense when I got the full story.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 1:14 pm |

Here, for example.
Having looked at thousands and thousanda of photo over the years, I will tell you that white numbers would look a lot brighter in this photo…http://www.vintageca...

One thing I will add. I do look at many old b&w pics and try and figure out some colors for colorizing. While some colors like the red and blue and very hard to tell. White is one that most can tell is white.

I have done this in looking at old Ohio State numbers from 1929 unis and when they first wore gray helmets. Even light gray looks different but distinguishable in b&w.

The light silver does seem tricky though.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 3:50 pm |

Watch this…http://www.youtube.c...
Doesn’t take long to determine (if you keep an eye on the Giants front numbers), that the Colts jerseys are white, and the Giants’ numbers are not.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 5:42 pm |

Been doing some digging (old photos, watched things like the NFL films ’62 tile game at Yankee Stadium). It looks like the silver/gray numbers may have been changed to white when the “ny” was added to the helmets in ’61.

Or the following year because, by golly, even my Kid Cards show it that way. Silver numbers through ’61, white in ’62. Had completely forgotten that.

But I knew they were silver at least up through the time of the GGEP.

Le Cracquere|
March 12, 2012 at 10:53 am |

What’s more, Phil’s aesthetic argument is HIGHLY contestable. Not only do I find the blue road caps better-looking, I hate the monotonous, unrelieved red in the current Cardinals’ home uniform. I’d replace the current home cap with a blue crown/red bill number that echoes the Musial days. Maybe add white/blue/white stripes to the stirrups while we’re at it.

JTH|
March 11, 2012 at 9:37 am |

What about including the Chiefs and Blackhawks in this contest (and, as pointed out by The Jeff, the Eskimos)?

I never really hear much about these teams’ nicknames being considered offensive, but if we’re looking at pro teams with Native American (or First Nations) imagery, why stop at just three?

And they could name the mascot “Boris the Spider”. Tho instead of spitting venom on children, he could play guitar or something.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 10:36 am |

Ooo, combine them.
Cleveland Rockin’ Spiders.

Jim|
March 11, 2012 at 10:19 am |

I thought about that worst team of all time karma when I wrote that. Cleveland does not need to court any more bad karma. As far as the black, however, what if they modeled themselves after the brown recluse? They could tie in with the colors of the Cleveland Browns. (Oh, wait. More bad karma.)

teenchy|
March 11, 2012 at 11:21 am |

Not necessarily; think of the brown recluse. Padres have abandoned brown; no reason some other MLB team couldn’t pick it up.

teenchy|
March 11, 2012 at 11:22 am |

Crud, Jim, I didn’t scroll down and see your response. Apologies.

Brady|
March 11, 2012 at 9:54 am |

As an American Indian coming from a full blood family, I can honestly say most natives don’t give a crap if the team is named the Redskins, or the Indians, or the Braves. Hell, you can rename them the Injuns for all I care. Those that do care just want to bring attention to the tribe. ಠ_ಠ

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 10:04 am |

Thanks for the other side of this…as a Jew, it wouldn’t bother me to have a team named the Jews or have a knish as it’s logo…the problem is though once that name is out there, it becomes very easy for someone to turn it negative…if the team cut payroll, it would be the Cheap Jews for example. The only way to eliminate any chance of insensitivity is to avoid these type names.

Brady|
March 11, 2012 at 10:07 am |

I might have just pissed my pants laughing.

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 10:09 am |

See…comedy has ustained the Jews as a people for 5000 years.

Jet|
March 11, 2012 at 9:56 am |

Damn the Padres, over 25 years of uni-suckage with no end in sight. Bring back the brown!

-Jet

concealed78|
March 11, 2012 at 10:06 am |

No kidding. They haven’t looked like themselves since 1990.

Steve D|
March 11, 2012 at 10:11 am |

Wasn’t that Joe McIlvaine’s idea when he went there from the Mets…to give them Met colors?

concealed78|
March 11, 2012 at 10:15 am |

I have no idea. I’d assume it was a throwback to the PCL Padres.

Ricko|
March 11, 2012 at 10:23 am |

‘Twas.
Last PCL Pads wore navy and orange…with navy pins.http://www.sandiegoh...
(couldn’t find a color shot quickly, but he basically kept the same unis, just switched the brown to navy and the hat logo to two-color)

Yup, for a throwback.
I was referencing the aforementioned change, which took the last brown/orange Padres unis and gave them a look that certainly harked back to the final PCL version…http://exhibits.base...

concealed78|
March 11, 2012 at 10:05 am |

So I take it “Screaming Scalping Injuns” is out?

If Cleveland must make a change, I’d prefer they keep the theme and go with “Cleveland Totems”, “Cleveland Spirit”, “Cleveland Tribe”. Or maybe “Cleveland Dawgs” to continue the Browns theme, even tho that sounds totally Minor League.

Atlanta Bees (royal & Athletic Gold)

Chris|
March 11, 2012 at 10:07 am |

You really shouldn’t be able to get away with introducing a totally new color into a team’s uniform. Black, grey, maybe, but orange on Louisville and Cincinnati just looks like a mistake. I was watching warmups at the Big East Tournament last night and thought it must have been Conference Poaching Awareness Month or something with all the misplaced orange.

scott|
March 11, 2012 at 10:17 am |

Really dislike those white panelled caps for the Orioles… too much of a ’70s and ’80s vibe.

concealed78|
March 11, 2012 at 10:22 am |

I like the cartoon bird, but the white panel cap doesn’t go with that uni. Just revert the 1966-70 set. They nailed it with that one.

pushbutton|
March 11, 2012 at 2:20 pm |

Yes! The ’66 uniform was balanced and timeless. Now they’re trying to mash up aspects of every uni they’ve ever worn.

I heart the 70s more than life itself, but trucker caps? If you’re gonna do that bring back the sansabelts, too.

Their script is just comically large. Subtlety is lost on these people.

Jim Vilk|
March 11, 2012 at 10:36 am |

Really love those white-paneled caps for the Orioles. Now I just need an adjustable mesh-back version.

Design new uniforms AND wipe out the offensive / politically incorrect names in one fell swoop?!!! What in the Wide World of Sports is going on here??!! What’s next – Designs for world peace? Doesn’t he have uniform already?

Be that as it may I want to say “Count me in.” Guess I should step up as I have commented on this issue in the past.

The indecipherable rainbow border…the mismatched wordmark lettering…the BLACK plague of Miami…the GARGANTUAN logo on the HAT, the CHEST, the SLEEVE.

I’m all for fun, color and boldness but–who’s kidding who here?–this uniform is awful.

DJ|
March 11, 2012 at 11:39 am |

I have been a wholesale uniform sales rep for the past 5+ years, selling to high schools and colleges. I love what y’all do and try to keep up as best I can. In my time as a sales rep, I’ve met with the owners and other higher ups at multiple uniform manufacturers and have never heard the term “headspoon”. I have seen y’all refer to the “headspoon” on uniforms and am just curious what that means? Can you please explain? Thanks. Keep up the great work!

The headspoon is piping that goes up the chest and around the collar and back down again…the shape of a spoon if you think about it.

mmwatkin|
March 11, 2012 at 12:37 pm |

I like that teams like the Dodgers and Yankees wear BP uniforms in Spring Training. It is always weird to me when you see a non-roster invitee wearing the classic Detroit Tiger home uniform. Save those beauties for the 25-man roster.

Jim Vilk|
March 11, 2012 at 1:25 pm |

I should have been taping the game, but nooooo…

In today’s Atlantic 10 final (played in Atlantic City’s beautiful Boardwalk Hall), Xavier forward Andre Walker is wearing different colored shoes. According to Verne Lundquist, Walker only brought two pairs of shoes to the tourney. He blew out his left shoe in an earlier game. He switched to his other pair, then at some point he blew out the right shoe…so now he’s stuck with a mismatched pair.

LarryB|
March 11, 2012 at 1:25 pm |

Always have to give kudos to the colorizers today. Nice job and the part I go to first on weekends.

Shane|
March 11, 2012 at 2:10 pm |

Speaking of the new O’s caps, Buck Showalter is wearing the black and orange cap with the orange “O’s” today. The rest of the team/staff is wearing the cartoon bird panel cap.

I was looking on the champs sports website at the new nike hyper elite uniforms available. For UCONN’s jersey it included the last name Boatright in the photo, which I know must’ve been a mistake because college jerseys for sale do not carry player’s names. I found it ironic that it was the same player (Ryan Boatright) suspended by NCAA for improper benefits.

The Celtics wearing their St. Patrick’s alts against the Lakers in their Sundays “worsts”… It’s becoming a total rarity in the NBA to see big teams face off in traditional uniforms. Now get off my lawn.

Note how you can *barely* tell that this is an Oakland A’s fashion cap from the logo on the cap. Odd that the photoshopper that made this would not only not use an On-Field Official MLB cap with the On-Field Official big sticker, but also pair the A’s cap (which is made by New Era) with a non-59Fifty understicker.

I guess this wont be a shock to anybody but I’m disliking that new Baltimore look more each time I see it, always hated that hat. Same for the Padres, major downgrade for them. And I’m in the .00000000000000001% minority not liking the Mets moves (I like black, what can I say). I’m still holding out final judgement on the Marlins. I can’t really say I hate it but I don’t like it either. Same for Toronto.

Matt|
March 12, 2012 at 9:21 am |

Could get rid of the nickname entirely and just go by the city name. It works for soccer clubs all over the world. Many of the fans would likely still use the old nickname, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

S-Dot|
March 12, 2012 at 11:28 am |

I hate how the Nationals completely eschew their Expos heritage.

No retired numbers, no memorial for Gary Carter. Wipe the slate clean…a disgrace.